No one here is making and distributing copies of copyrighted material that I know about. I believe that you must simply be taking EnglishDispenser’s word about this, and repeating this dogma.
If you are doing something other than repeating Dogma then show me an example of what you are talking about. It’s a simple request, right?
Well then, in your vast experience you must know of one document that states it’s illegal for a customer (an end-user, me) to use the fitting software.
I’ll bet you can’t point to one. You know why? There is none. Not one. Zero, Zip, Nada.
I’ll bet you can’t point to one. You know why? There is none. Not one. Zero, Zip, Nada.
[sigh] There doesn’t need to be any document.
Copyright protection is automatic - no documents needed.
Why not read up on Copyright law before posting opinions framed as fact on forums?
I wasn’t talking about Copyright law when I asked you to point out a document. I know (that you know) that I can legally the use fitting software. But you will never admit it.
Now if we want to talk about how this forum is becoming a mall or mart for illegal software trading…
Well that’s just not truthful. Is it? Whoever made that statement is not being truthful. This forum is nowhere close to a mall or mart for illegal software trading. It is not. That is simply not true. It’s not true.
If anyone has evidence of that then please point it out. Otherwise stop posting such nonsense.
I know (that you know) that I can legally the use fitting software. But you will never admit it.
… but you cannot legally use the fitting software … or any other software for that matter … without explicit permission.
Believe what you like, but the law is the law.
It applies to all creative output : music, poetry, drawings, software.
If you live in an alternative universe, fine … but in this universe you cannot legally use unlicensed software … including fitting software.
That’s it. That’s the law. You have been told. Your alternative musings and opinions are irrelevant. Nothing more to say.
I can legally use the fitting software. I have the exact same click-license/agreement that you have.
Here’s a picture of it (with a fictitious business named HA-Manufacturer)…
Sorry, the picture was lost.
The definition of this may vary from country to country, but I don’t think it is licensed to you unless the copyright holder takes some action to license you. I don’t think they will issue a license to a hearing aid consumer because of legal issues if you blow out your hearing using their software.
So although the likelyhood of being prosecuted is low (as long as you are the end user and are using it to adjust your own hearing aids, which you paid for), I don’t think there is any way you can say you own a licensed copy, even if they post the software on a website and do not require a key.
Thanks for your post Don. But I believe I do own a licensed copy.
First of all, I don’t see anything in writing saying that I am excluded. Do you?
Second, what is the difference between my click-agreement with the manufacturer, and the click-agreement between audiologist/manufacturer? Does the audiologist have an agreement that is more specific than the agreement that I have? I think not. I think they are the same and I think they are very clear.
pvc,
You really don’t ‘get it’. You are simply seeing what you want to see.
Fine, if if makes you happy and lifts the guilt from your shoulders.
However if this ever made a court case (which of course it won’t) then you would be asked lots of nasty questions.
For example:
“Do you believe that you are the intended audience for this software?”
“Is this software specifically provided to End Users … or did you have to find it via unorthodox means?”
"Was this software provided on a ‘Professional Audiologists’ section of a website? if so, are you a ‘Professional Audiologist’?
“Are you professionally qualified to use this software?”
I don’t know if you have ever been in a court case - but I have. It’s not a fun experience. No amount of “There wasn’t a notice excluding me.” will get you off the hook.
I agree with other posters that you have a zero chance of being taken to court … but deep in your soul you know that you have no right to use that software.
No amount of nit picking about software licence wording changes the fact that the software is not intended to be used by you.
If the software was available only on the professional section of the website that would be enough to exclude non-pros from software licensing.
But again, I don’t think any manufacturer is going to prosecute one of their end users for using the software to adjust their own hearing aids.
What? I can’t hear you! 
Oh, I mean Yes.
I found it right here in this thread. I just clicked the link.
I just clicked the link man. It said Client Systems Support. It didn’t say anything about professional audiologists. It did say PEOPLE FIRST and I’m a person.
Yes. I have lots of experience with software and I have lots of experience with hearing.
pvc,
If you are 100% sure that you are right then just to be sure please email Phonak / whoever enquiring if you are licenced to use their software.
Please could you post their response here.
Many thanks.
We (my wife and I) are no longer interested in using Phonak products. The wireless communications has a tendency to get stuck when programming with the iCube. Then it takes a Hi-Pro and cables connection to get the wireless communications unstuck. Makes one wonder if Phonak did this intentionally?
The type of cables required are CS44A Phonak cables. The Phonak cable is almost the same as a standard CS44 cable except pins 3&4 are reversed. Again, makes one wonder why Phonak did this?
If you don’t have the CS44A Phonak cables then you can use standard CS44 cables along with DIY CS44A converter cables. To find out how to make a set of DIY converter cables just Google CS44A. Go ahead try the Google search. Guess what comes up as the very first link? This comes up first -> My-Project-For-A-DIY-CS44A-Phonak-programming-cable 
Makes one wonder if Phonak did this intentionally?
That comment tells us way more about your rather novel view of the world than it does about Phonak.
Stick and stones… Phonak’s slogan should be AUDIOLOGISTS FIRST
The thing is, we hearing aid wearers are not really the manufacturers customers. They can’t legally sell to us or provide any hands on help directly or they would be practicing, and then must have a license to practice. Once you are in the audiologists office they would be glad to help. The professionals are their real customers.
Or . . . you know . . . “Following the law first!”
What law? These is no law regarding boycotting this pos Phonak product.
thanks for the fitting software